When a filmmaker like Joel Coen or Xavier Dolan heads a jury as prestigious as the Cannes Film Festival, is he taking on more of the role of the film critic than the filmmaker? In essence, isn't he judging one film against another in the same way that critics pick films to recommend or choose the best of the year? And how does analyzing and discussing film on a jury impact the way they approach the art form in the future? These questions were raised at this year's Cannes Film Festival, and we have video to share of their response along with an insightful article by Jason Gorber, who writes:
"So is Joel then correct in saying he’s not a film critic per-se when he’s president of a Jury? Given that deliberations are behind closed doors rather than on the page, in some ways the Coens and their fellow jurors have an advantage over most who have to defend their point of view in the body of a review. The jury declares a winner in a given category with a few choice and positive adjectives and lets that stand. In that way, some would argue, awarding the Palme d’Or is the ultimate capsule review – pithy, provocative, yet definitive."
RogerEbert.com Cannes 2015 Jury on Being Honorary Film Critics from The Mint on Vimeo.